Jimquisition: Videogames Are Not Movies, Get Over It
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You know how the other big video contributors have something on the screen other than the guy talking into a microphone in front of a wall?
Stick with that.
Stick with that.
OK, I feel like I was harsh on Jim, I especially liked the Deadly Premonition review and Deadly Premonition vs. Heavy Rain stuff he did on Destructiod, it was good to see someone take a stand for an under reviewed game (that was amazing).
Just something about this doesn't work for me, can we give him a table and chair at least? Maybe a few more less shit graphics?
EDIT: I am enjoying hearing so much about Jim Cornette.
Just something about this doesn't work for me, can we give him a table and chair at least? Maybe a few more less shit graphics?
EDIT: I am enjoying hearing so much about Jim Cornette.
Delivery was really more annoying than entertaining -- you can tell the guy's more accustomed to being in front of a keyboard than in front of a camera. I won't say yet that he should have a column rather than a video series, he's still got opportunity to improve, but I will say that I would rather have read this article than watched this video.
And while I agree with the gist of his argument, and he made some good points, he made one mistake -- an easily-avoided one, at that -- that pulls the rug out from under a large chunk of his presentation.
He conflated "film-quality narrative" with "film-like narrative."
"As good as" is an entirely different descriptor from "similar to," and you really can't argue with the fact that, at this time, the best films have told far better stories than the best video games.
Additionally, in arguing that films don't get the belittling comparison to other media that video games do, he's blatantly ignoring history. 100 years ago, film was still in its infancy, and 80 years ago, was just finding its legs. And throughout the history of film (but especially in those early years), movies were frequently compared to *novels*, an equally poor comparison between media, if not moreso. In fact, I'd say video games share more in common with film than film does with literature. (Though games share more in common with literature than either of the other two comparisons.) While I can't recall reading about it, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if early filmmakers were compared to Melville, Stoker or Voltaire.
Games are likely to see comparison to film for a long time yet, and sometimes, that comparison will be apt.
But I do agree completely that games have the potential to be something more -- or at least something very different. But film took a long time to really come into its own, even after it had a few real classics under its belt; we can't expect much different from any other medium.
And while I agree with the gist of his argument, and he made some good points, he made one mistake -- an easily-avoided one, at that -- that pulls the rug out from under a large chunk of his presentation.
He conflated "film-quality narrative" with "film-like narrative."
"As good as" is an entirely different descriptor from "similar to," and you really can't argue with the fact that, at this time, the best films have told far better stories than the best video games.
Additionally, in arguing that films don't get the belittling comparison to other media that video games do, he's blatantly ignoring history. 100 years ago, film was still in its infancy, and 80 years ago, was just finding its legs. And throughout the history of film (but especially in those early years), movies were frequently compared to *novels*, an equally poor comparison between media, if not moreso. In fact, I'd say video games share more in common with film than film does with literature. (Though games share more in common with literature than either of the other two comparisons.) While I can't recall reading about it, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if early filmmakers were compared to Melville, Stoker or Voltaire.
Games are likely to see comparison to film for a long time yet, and sometimes, that comparison will be apt.
But I do agree completely that games have the potential to be something more -- or at least something very different. But film took a long time to really come into its own, even after it had a few real classics under its belt; we can't expect much different from any other medium.
: /
I still stand by that video games are art. It shouldn't matter what the intention of the piece is, video games are simply collages of digital art, traditional art, sound, music, and many more mediums. They aren't movies, but they work a lot like them. Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know a lot about the processes of either, methinks.
Anyway, didn't find this new guy funny or very smart. He also looks like one of those reverends or whatever who 'heal' people on the television...
I still stand by that video games are art. It shouldn't matter what the intention of the piece is, video games are simply collages of digital art, traditional art, sound, music, and many more mediums. They aren't movies, but they work a lot like them. Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know a lot about the processes of either, methinks.
Anyway, didn't find this new guy funny or very smart. He also looks like one of those reverends or whatever who 'heal' people on the television...
It could also be because she's actually funny with the live-action gags and is confident and 'down-to-earth' in what she talks about. <.<Icehearted said:
You're the one who brought up sex appeal, so...take that as you will...
But yea, I watched the swearing guy's video. Can that nasty frame get the heck away from my other movies now? xD
An abrasive man with an unpleasant attitude puts on a silly outfit and films himself having a bit of a know-it-all rant against a plain wall. Were we supposed to be making fun of him, or is this somehow supposed to be taken seriously? Who is this video aimed at, developers or consumers? I can't imagine a developer taking the time to watch more than the first 20 seconds, but why would a consumer actually give a shit about this topic?
Most of the Escapist's content is stuff I find entertaining, but I had my fill of this one about halfway through, and so I have no idea how it ended. Significantly, I find that I don't care at all. This "Jimquisition" doesn't seem to be remotely up to the standards of the Escapist - it would be much more entertaining to have Yahtzee read the classified ads, or watch Lisa Foiles eat a bowl of cereal, than to listen to another rant/tantrum from this Jim fellow.
Most of the Escapist's content is stuff I find entertaining, but I had my fill of this one about halfway through, and so I have no idea how it ended. Significantly, I find that I don't care at all. This "Jimquisition" doesn't seem to be remotely up to the standards of the Escapist - it would be much more entertaining to have Yahtzee read the classified ads, or watch Lisa Foiles eat a bowl of cereal, than to listen to another rant/tantrum from this Jim fellow.
